Identify and Map the Key Value Chains
Map the major Task-sets for all of your Products and/or Services – P/Ss.
From conception to production to delivery – etc.
Don’t worry – we won’t forget about sending the invoices. And then the paychecks.
Focus on the P/Ss.
An Organization Chart of “Departments”
Then look at your Organization Charts. But look at them as both collections of people – and as collections of Processes.
And call them functions, or divisions, or strategic business units. And if higher than a function – such as Engineering – then break them down to their sets-of-departments grouping. Get to the department level.
Imagine that the Org Chart above represents groups of people trying to get a set of tasks done.
At the 1st Tier level – are the people, including the CEO (or other title) running the show/business.
At the 2nd Tier level – which can itself become multiple levels – so adjust your picture of the graphic in your mind for addressing your context as this “level/levels” can include the Division people … or the SBU people … or the functional people in such major functions such as Marketing, Finance, Engineering, Manufacturing, Merchandising, Distribution, Retail Operations, HR, etc. Look at your own Org Chart.
And see it at the department level…
At the 3rd Tier level – are the Department levels. For the Sales function it might include Sales Operations, Field Sales, Inside Sales, Sales Support, etc. Think about your sales function – at the department level (or Team level).
Don’t let the labels/language hang you up. Change my language here to yours – from the git go.
Next – identify the Processes that the target Department is involved with – either as the Process Owner organization – or some Process Player organization.
See the Process framework along these lines below – and adapt my language to yours as needed.
What are the boxes in the above graphics?
The Analysis/Breakdown Continues
If the Department above was the Field Sales Organization – this is the set of AoPs – Areas of Performance – for an Account Representative (the sales people).
Here is one page of their Performance Model charts for one AoP…
After doing these for the entire job – or the narrower focus – project scope depending/limiting – one would move next to the enablers. If the project effort is targeted at Learning/ Training/ Knowledge Management – the next step is to analyze the enabling Knowledge and Skill enablers – the K/Ss.
I use 17 categories to derive the enabling K/Ss for a set of Performance Competence requirements. Here they are.
Here is an example of the data captured as a result of my Analysis methods for systematically deriving the enabling K/Ss. This is one page of perhaps 20-25 of such charts/matrices.
The key thing – utility – affordance – with the above derived set of data- is that when you are packaging the content in Performance Support tools content, or Performance Based Content (Instruction and/or Information).
Those sets of Content can be organized at a module level – or sub-module level (again – change my language to yours if that makes sense).
But – it’s almost always about something other than Learning-Knowledge/Skills of the Performers that is at the root of any business issue (problem/opportunity).
Learning just rears it’s head when the implementation of the real solution – dealing with the gaps from ideal in the other sets of enablers – is being planned (planned well or poorly).
It’s not all about Learning – even if it starts out as being all about Learning.
It’s all about Performance.
Too much of Formal Learning is Not Authentic Enough – and won’t transfer – and wouldn’t lead to any improvements if it did transfer. It’s not authentic content that is being delivered that reflects, in the first place, the required Performance Competence.
Too much of Informal Learning is Not Instructional Enough – and won’t transfer – and wouldn’t lead to any improvements if it did transfer. It’s not a valid delivery method for first enabling and then maintaining, the required Performance Competence.
And worse – Learning isn’t often going to address the real issue(s) – all by itself – and it too often is expected to do so.
# # #